A federal appeals court has ordered a pause on Donald Trump's obligation to pay E. Jean Carroll an $83 million defamation judgment, keeping the case in legal limbo while the Supreme Court decides whether to take it.
The 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in New York issued the stay Monday after Trump requested it halt an earlier ruling that had rejected his bid to challenge the defamation award before the full appeals panel. The court granted the freeze with a significant condition: Trump must post an additional $7.46 million in bond to account for interest accruing during what is expected to be a lengthy Supreme Court review process.
Carroll's attorney Roberta Kaplan framed the ruling as a win for her client. "We are pleased that the Second Circuit conditioned the stay on President Trump posting a bond of nearly $100 million," she said, noting that Trump's previous bond increases had already pushed the total owed beyond $91 million as of Monday's decision.
Trump's legal strategy hinges on an unusual argument: his team is asking the courts to replace him as the defendant with the U.S. government itself. The theory rests on invoking a federal statute that would shift liability to the government for actions Trump took as president. If successful, the gambit would effectively eliminate Carroll's case, since federal law generally shields the government from defamation suits.
The appeals court rejected that same argument last month when Trump sought a full hearing on it. Now the case advances toward potential Supreme Court consideration, a stage where Trump has already filed a separate appeal in another $5 million defamation judgment that Carroll won against him.
A jury ruled in Carroll's favor in 2024, finding that Trump defamed her by repeatedly denying her allegations that he sexually assaulted her in a department store dressing room decades earlier. Trump has since pursued multiple legal avenues to overturn the verdict and avoid payment.
Author Sarah Mitchell: "Trump's bond increase is a practical reminder that even billionaires face real financial pressure when courts move deliberately, and the government-defendant swap strategy feels like a Hail Mary that's unlikely to survive serious Supreme Court scrutiny."
Comments